IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pbio00/3003653.html

New approaches to meta-analyze differences in skewness, kurtosis, and correlation

Author

Listed:
  • Pietro Pollo
  • Szymon M Drobniak
  • Hamed Haselimashhadi
  • Malgorzata Lagisz
  • Ayumi Mizuno
  • Laura A B Wilson
  • Daniel W A Noble
  • Shinichi Nakagawa

Abstract

Biological differences between males and females are pervasive. Researchers often focus on sex differences in the mean or, occasionally, in variation, albeit other measures can be useful for biomedical and biological research. For instance, differences in skewness (asymmetry of a distribution), kurtosis (heaviness of a distribution’s tails), and correlation (relationship between two variables) might be crucial to improve medical diagnosis and to understand natural processes. Yet, there are currently no meta-analytic ways to measure differences in these metrics between two groups. We propose three effect size statistics to fill this gap: Δsk, Δku, and ΔZr, which measure differences in skewness, kurtosis, and correlation, respectively. Besides presenting the rationale for the calculation of these effect size statistics, we conducted a simulation to explore their properties and used a large dataset of mice traits to illustrate their potential. For example, in our case study, we found that females show, on average, a greater correlation between fat mass and heart weight than males. Although calculating Δsk, Δku, and ΔZr will require large sample sizes of individual data, technological advancements in data collection create increase opportunities to use these effect size statistics. Importantly, Δsk, Δku, and ΔZr can be used to compare any two groups, allowing a new generation of meta-analyses that explore such differences and potentially leading to new insights in multiple fields of study.Biological differences between males and females are pervasive, but researchers often focus on sex differences in the mean. This study presents new statistical tools that allow researchers to compare differences in skewness, kurtosis and correlations between groups, opening the door to richer meta-analyses.

Suggested Citation

  • Pietro Pollo & Szymon M Drobniak & Hamed Haselimashhadi & Malgorzata Lagisz & Ayumi Mizuno & Laura A B Wilson & Daniel W A Noble & Shinichi Nakagawa, 2026. "New approaches to meta-analyze differences in skewness, kurtosis, and correlation," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 24(2), pages 1-15, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:3003653
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.3003653
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3003653
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3003653&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pbio.3003653?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Benjamin Phillips & Timo N Haschler & Natasha A Karp, 2023. "Statistical simulations show that scientists need not increase overall sample size by default when including both sexes in in vivo studies," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(6), pages 1-14, June.
    2. Janine A. Clayton & Francis S. Collins, 2014. "Policy: NIH to balance sex in cell and animal studies," Nature, Nature, vol. 509(7500), pages 282-283, May.
    3. Cara Tannenbaum & Robert P. Ellis & Friederike Eyssel & James Zou & Londa Schiebinger, 2019. "Sex and gender analysis improves science and engineering," Nature, Nature, vol. 575(7781), pages 137-146, November.
    4. Natasha A. Karp & Jeremy Mason & Arthur L. Beaudet & Yoav Benjamini & Lynette Bower & Robert E. Braun & Steve D.M. Brown & Elissa J. Chesler & Mary E. Dickinson & Ann M. Flenniken & Helmut Fuchs & Mar, 2017. "Prevalence of sexual dimorphism in mammalian phenotypic traits," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Natasha A. Karp & Manuel Berdoy & Kelly Gray & Lilian Hunt & Maggy Jennings & Angela Kerton & Matt Leach & Jordi L. Tremoleda & Jon Gledhill & Esther J. Pearl & Nathalie Percie du Sert & Benjamin Phil, 2025. "The Sex Inclusive Research Framework to address sex bias in preclinical research proposals," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 16(1), pages 1-6, December.
    2. Takuji Usui & Malcolm R Macleod & Sarah K McCann & Alistair M Senior & Shinichi Nakagawa, 2021. "Meta-analysis of variation suggests that embracing variability improves both replicability and generalizability in preclinical research," PLOS Biology, Public Library of Science, vol. 19(5), pages 1-20, May.
    3. Lori van den Hurk & Sarah Hiltner & Sabine Oertelt-Prigione, 2022. "Operationalization and Reporting Practices in Manuscripts Addressing Gender Differences in Biomedical Research: A Cross-Sectional Bibliographical Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-13, November.
    4. Laura A. B. Wilson & Susanne R. K. Zajitschek & Malgorzata Lagisz & Jeremy Mason & Hamed Haselimashhadi & Shinichi Nakagawa, 2022. "Sex differences in allometry for phenotypic traits in mice indicate that females are not scaled males," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-12, December.
    5. Mounia Tannour-Louet & Didier F. Pisani & Hichem Bouguerra & Alycia Zedda & Marine Bourcier & Noura Lamghari & Nadine Gautier & Benoit Chaput & Elodie Riant & Anne Bouloumié & Emilie Montastier & Nath, 2026. "NCOA1 is a gatekeeper of the sexually dimorphic thermogenic activity of white adipose tissue," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 17(1), pages 1-18, December.
    6. repec:plo:pbio00:1002151 is not listed on IDEAS
    7. Lin Zhang & Beibei Sun & Fei Shu & Ying Huang, 2022. "Comparing paper level classifications across different methods and systems: an investigation of Nature publications," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(12), pages 7633-7651, December.
    8. C. Z. Kalenga & J. Parsons Leigh & J. Griffith & D. C. Wolf & S. M. Dumanski & A. Desjarlais & L. Petermann & S. B. Ahmed, 2020. "Sex and gender considerations in health research: a trainee and allied research personnel perspective," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 7(1), pages 1-7, December.
    9. Fosch-Villaronga, Eduard & Calleja, Carlos José & Drukarch, Hadassah & Torricelli, Diego, 2023. "How can ISO 13482:2014 account for the ethical and social considerations of robotic exoskeletons?," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    10. April Schweinhart & Janine Austin Clayton, 2018. "Reversing the Trends toward Shorter Lives and Poorer Health for U.S. Women: A Call for Innovative Interdisciplinary Research," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-14, August.
    11. Fosch-Villaronga, Eduard & Mut-Piña, Antoni & Verhoef, Tessa & Poulsen, Adam & Søraa, Roger A. & Custers, Bart, 2026. "Misgendering algorithms: Insights from a cross-sectional survey on algorithmic gender classification in social media," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    12. Ashwin V. Kammula & Alejandro A. Schäffer & Padma Sheila Rajagopal & Razelle Kurzrock & Eytan Ruppin, 2024. "Outcome differences by sex in oncology clinical trials," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    13. Lorraine Greaves, 2020. "Missing in Action: Sex and Gender in Substance Use Research," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-7, March.
    14. Venera R. Khalikova & Mushan Jin & Shauhrat S. Chopra, 2021. "Gender in sustainability research: Inclusion, intersectionality, and patterns of knowledge production," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 25(4), pages 900-912, August.
    15. Jacopo Ambrosj & Kris Dierickx & Hugh Desmond, 2024. "Codes of conduct should help scientists navigate societal expectations," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-6, December.
    16. Michael O’Grady & Eleni Mangina, 2022. "Adoption of Responsible Research and Innovation in Citizen Observatories," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(12), pages 1-14, June.
    17. Alexander S. Long & Brian J. Reich & Ana‐Maria Staicu & John Meitzen, 2023. "A nonparametric test of group distributional differences for hierarchically clustered functional data," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 3778-3791, December.
    18. Jiang, Xuan, 2021. "Women in STEM: Ability, preference, and value," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    19. repec:plo:pone00:0099900 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. repec:osf:osfxxx:3agxf_v1 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Paula Otero-Hermida & Clara Furió-Vico, 2025. "The Evolution of Gender Monitoring and its Challenges: the Case of Research and Innovation in Europe," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 180(3), pages 1291-1317, December.
    22. Ballering, Aranka V. & Bonvanie, Irma J. & Olde Hartman, Tim C. & Monden, Rei & Rosmalen, Judith G.M., 2020. "Gender and sex independently associate with common somatic symptoms and lifetime prevalence of chronic disease," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 253(C).
    23. Matschegg, Doris & Carlon, Elisa & Sturmlechner, Rita & Sonnleitner, Andrea & Fuhrmann, Marilene & Dißauer, Christa & Strasser, Christoph & Enigl, Monika, 2023. "Investigation of individual motives and decision paths on residential energy supply systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 281(C).

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pbio00:3003653. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosbiology (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.